Amanda-Users

Re: more doubts

2003-10-17 04:28:23
Subject: Re: more doubts
From: Paul Bijnens <paul.bijnens AT xplanation DOT com>
To: rohit AT genetechindia DOT com
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 10:19:52 +0200
Rohit wrote:
From: "Jon LaBadie" <jon AT jgcomp DOT com>

I don't think your assumption is correct. I think runspercycle "ignores" the units part. So it was thinking you had a total of 5
runs per dumpcycle.


I read it somewhere it this mailing list that runspercycle does compute based on units specified. Also, amadmin balance command showed "estimated 35 runs per dumpcycle" in the last line when I had
runspercycle as 5 weeks. When I removed 'weeks' from that line --
then it showed correct value -- 5 runs per dumpcycle.

runspercycle does indeed take a unit if specified.

The program doesn't even check if a unit is appropriate for the
config, so you could just as well say:
        tapecycle 20 bps

or specify in tapetype:

        speed 400000 weeks

instead of (rounded)  2800 kps.  Really funny/confusing.



The possible units are:

keytab_t numb_keytable[] = {
    { "B", MULT1 },
    { "BPS", MULT1 },
    { "BYTE", MULT1 },
    { "BYTES", MULT1 },
    { "DAY", MULT1 },
    { "DAYS", MULT1 },
    { "INF", INFINITY },
    { "K", MULT1K },
    { "KB", MULT1K },
    { "KBPS", MULT1K },
    { "KBYTE", MULT1K },
    { "KBYTES", MULT1K },
    { "KILOBYTE", MULT1K },
    { "KILOBYTES", MULT1K },
    { "KPS", MULT1K },
    { "M", MULT1M },
    { "MB", MULT1M },
    { "MBPS", MULT1M },
    { "MBYTE", MULT1M },
    { "MBYTES", MULT1M },
    { "MEG", MULT1M },
    { "MEGABYTE", MULT1M },
    { "MEGABYTES", MULT1M },
    { "G", MULT1G },
    { "GB", MULT1G },
    { "GBPS", MULT1G },
    { "GBYTE", MULT1G },
    { "GBYTES", MULT1G },
    { "GIG", MULT1G },
    { "GIGABYTE", MULT1G },
    { "GIGABYTES", MULT1G },
    { "MPS", MULT1M },
    { "TAPE", MULT1 },
    { "TAPES", MULT1 },
    { "WEEK", MULT7 },
    { "WEEKS", MULT7 },
    { NULL, IDENT }
};


Attached to this email is snippet of amdump log file. Amanda
identified total size of approx 25 GB to be backed up. Whereas by
tape could could only take in approx 19 GB (though it is 12/24 GB


From your logfiles:

DELAYING DUMPS IF NEEDED, total_size 25877861, tape length 1976320 mark 111


It seems amanda is asuming your tapelength is only 1_976_320 Kbytes,
that only 1.9 Gbyte, not 19 Gyte.  The above resembles like a DDS2
drive with 90 meter tapes to me.

Have a look at "tapetype ..." and the corresponding "define tapetype
..." in your amanda.conf.  Maybe you have a duplicate define?



--
Paul Bijnens, Xplanation                            Tel  +32 16 397.511
Technologielaan 21 bus 2, B-3001 Leuven, BELGIUM    Fax  +32 16 397.512
http://www.xplanation.com/          email:  Paul.Bijnens AT xplanation DOT com
***********************************************************************
* I think I've got the hang of it now:  exit, ^D, ^C, ^\, ^Z, ^Q, F6, *
* quit,  ZZ, :q, :q!,  M-Z, ^X^C,  logoff, logout, close, bye,  /bye, *
* stop, end, F3, ~., ^]c, +++ ATH, disconnect, halt,  abort,  hangup, *
* PF4, F20, ^X^X, :D::D, KJOB, F14-f-e, F8-e,  kill -1 $$,  shutdown, *
* kill -9 1,  Alt-F4,  Ctrl-Alt-Del,  AltGr-NumLock,  Stop-A,  ...    *
* ...  "Are you sure?"  ...   YES   ...   Phew ...   I'm out          *
***********************************************************************



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>